I just emailed Baker, Ysearch GDC7F, and asked him to test for DF41. I advised him that I cannot guarantee the result. He only has 25 markers, so his resemblance to my cluster could be partly due to convergence, and he could be U106+.

The Morrisons are hiding away in their own web site. If anybody feels like getting the profiles and SNP-tests (if they are given) from there, I would be delighted.

I couldn't have said it better myself. Some SNP results and Y67 were in my spreadsheet attached to my off-list response. A direct link to the Morrison results spreadsheet (non-standard but useable, no SNP info) is:http://morrisondna.x10hosting.com/morrison/public_html/Morrison%20DNA%20Project.htmGroup Q is the only one you are interested in there. They are all highly likely DF41+. The rest of the Morrisons are just as likely DF41-.

Quote

I *do* hope, somebody will find the inspiration to approach the candidates in the potential Walker Group (Millers, McBurney and Johnston) and try convince them to order DF41 and join the project. Please note: I'm not 100% certain McBurney and Johnston have not already tested DF41 or any other SNPs.

For all who care, I've had a look at the McCown/Walker Cluster and found the following candidates. I do not know if any of these kits have already ordered a DF41 test.

Nr

Kit#

Y-Seach

Name

Country

1

21624

EE2U5

McCown

Ireland

2

45814

ZJZ3J

McCune

3

151802

--

McCune

Scotland

4

94904

YTJK2

Wilson

England

5

21647

8YRSC

McCleland

6

109546

SKRHH

McClelland

Scotland

7

25146

YSZ3M

McClellan

8

149709

--

McLelland

9

95276

N7KNN

McLellan

10

153956

4PCF6

Smith

England

11

27212

--

Smith

England

12

25971

--

Ramsey

13

30720

GGTHC

Elder

Scotland

14

93399

6P3NE

Edwards

15

147864

--

Webb ?

16

187514

--

Braughton

17

106240

--

Henry

N-Ireland

18

18391

GXK6G

Chamberlain ?

Few of these kits have done much SNP-testing, but the match to the McCown/Walker Motif is reasonable at first sight; I haven't checked the GD's (!!).

I guess, people interested in the history of R-DF41 will find the last two surnames fascinating. $:-)

OK, and now back to R-Z18 !!

You just touched one of my pet peeves. Does anybody else find the Y-search robot blocker as difficult as I do? I typically have to look at 20 or more of those distorted AND blurred visual puzzels before I can find one that I can decipher. I need a robot to get past their &_&^)) robot blocker! It would not be so bad if it would let me stay in once I got there, but having to go through the entire procedure again for each search is a real pain. Am I missing something?

Until I find better access, Y-search just doesn't exist for me. The view ain't worth the trip.

There are a handful of DF41 results this morning. Unless I miscounted, there were nine. The only positive was Miller, kit 96950.

Hamon, kit 84034 (France), and Kepler, kit 88876 (Germany), both of whom were in the DF41 section of Alex Williamson's last NJ tree, are both DF41-.

There are still 25 DF41 tests in Pending Lab Results and one in Pending Shipment to Lab.

Those two results are actually quite usefull, they are right in what we reckon was a spurious branch in Alex's diagram. Given that they are both negative as was Erwin we should see a major redrawing of the tree around the Stewarts in the next iteration.

I just emailed Baker, Ysearch GDC7F, and asked him to test for DF41. I advised him that I cannot guarantee the result. He only has 25 markers, so his resemblance to my cluster could be partly due to convergence, and he could be U106+.

If he tries it and gets a positive result, we'll know.

Well, that would mean, you are at the bottom of the list of suggestions. That should never be the case, of course. I've added a few new ones at the bottom of your cluster. The match to your cluster's motif will tend to get weaker as we go down the list, I'm afraid.

Just looked at your latest. I'll settle for sub-cluster for now, but.....

The Flux Network Program may tell us different the next time it is run, but a bit of simplistic creative number crunching and my intuition lead me to believe that Walker/Morrison is just a wee bit older which would make McCown the subcluster.}:>))

I just emailed Baker, Ysearch GDC7F, and asked him to test for DF41. I advised him that I cannot guarantee the result. He only has 25 markers, so his resemblance to my cluster could be partly due to convergence, and he could be U106+.

If he tries it and gets a positive result, we'll know.

Well, that would mean, you are at the bottom of the list of suggestions. That should never be the case, of course. I've added a few new ones at the bottom of your cluster. The match to your cluster's motif will tend to get weaker as we go down the list, I'm afraid.

I'm sure, you'll find the last two cases fascinating. $:-)

I might be able to offer some help with the last one.

I really appreciate your help, Peter. French, kit 102653, was one of the reasons I went ahead and tested for Z253 awhile back, because he is Z253+. So, he isn't really in our cluster after all.

I would bet money (but I won't) that guy from the Netherlands will turn out to be U106+ in the end.

I just emailed Baker, Ysearch GDC7F, and asked him to test for DF41. I advised him that I cannot guarantee the result. He only has 25 markers, so his resemblance to my cluster could be partly due to convergence, and he could be U106+.

If he tries it and gets a positive result, we'll know.

Well, that would mean, you are at the bottom of the list of suggestions. That should never be the case, of course. I've added a few new ones at the bottom of your cluster. The match to your cluster's motif will tend to get weaker as we go down the list, I'm afraid.

I'm sure, you'll find the last two cases fascinating. $:-)

I might be able to offer some help with the last one.

I really appreciate your help, Peter. French, kit 102653, was one of the reasons I went ahead and tested for Z253 awhile back, because he is Z253+. So, he isn't really in our cluster after all.

I would bet money (but I won't) that guy from the Netherlands will turn out to be U106+ in the end.

I haven't had a chance to check out those Smiths.

I must be a bit more careful and check things better before making suggestions. My impression was these people hadn't done much SNP testing.

BTW, if there'a another cluster of look-alikes on the other side of the fence, then testing will be complicated. If French is Z253+, then some of the others may be as well.

I'm wondering why Self, kit 53479, hasn't received his DF41 result yet. He ordered the test about the same time that Webb and I did. He's in our cluster and is a 66/67 match for Cooper. It's kind of aggravating.

I'm wondering why Self, kit 53479, hasn't received his DF41 result yet. He ordered the test about the same time that Webb and I did. He's in our cluster and is a 66/67 match for Cooper. It's kind of aggravating.

I'm wondering why Self, kit 53479, hasn't received his DF41 result yet. He ordered the test about the same time that Webb and I did. He's in our cluster and is a 66/67 match for Cooper. It's kind of aggravating.

Has he ordered his test with FT-Delay ?? $:-)

Yeah. He's still under the original predicted due date (24 October), but Webb and I got ours two weeks ago.

BTW, I guess it sounded like I was complaining. I wasn't, really. FTDNA has been generally really fast with the results of SNP tests lately. I appreciate that, especially considering that SNP test results, up until quite recently, used to take a couple of months or more. I was just expressing my aggravation that Self's results didn't come in with Webb's and mine. I am also anxiously awaiting the rest of the DF41 results.

I'm hoping we pick up a couple of unexpected positives from out in left field that will broaden the picture.

Peter has done a lot on his DF41 spreadsheet in the last couple of days. He has just about doubled the sample size and four clusters are coming together nicely, three of which closely correspond to Mike's 41-1426C, 41-1426C-A, and 41-1123. I find the fourth cluster most interesting as it includes elements of Mike's 41-1411 which was fraying at the edges along with some "problem" samples in a cluster which seems to be coming together. This is beginning to define areas within DF41 where we may want to look into some deeper testing for SNP discovery at some point in the future when we can go beyond the current WTY.

One question Peter, what is the significance of the light blue shading over some of the test results?

One question Peter, what is the significance of the light blue shading over some of the test results?

The shading, it's grey, honest $:-), indicates it's an "implied result" and not the result of any actual testing. E.g. if somebody is tested DF41+, then this imples DF13+ according to the Y-Tree and if he has not done an actual DF13 test, then the "+" in this column will be shaded.

There are five DF41 results this morning, all negative. Hebert, kit 4568, got his DF41 result, and, of course, it is negative. I am disappointed about that.

Many folks who were in the DF41 section of Alex Williamson's last NJ tree have tested DF41-. Apparently it's a tighter and more exclusive subclade than that tree indicated.

Well in some ways a negative is just as good as a positive. It shows again though how important SNP testing is to prove membership/closeness to STR clusters. It will be interesting to see what Alex's next NJ tree is like.